BJJ and cops (no, BJJ is not better than KF, etc etc etc..., but it's a cool article

[Ryu]

they're stealing my little "self-defense" program
:(
foiled again. :D

http://www.defendu.com/10_bjj_moves.htm

http://judoinfo.com/images/kimuraosawa.jpg


"One who takes pride in shallow knowledge or understanding is like a monkey who delights in adorning itself with garbage."

[David]

Nice article. I'm a bit concerned that people are getting "just enough of this training" and maybe not understanding what they're doing. A "carotid restraint" continued into unconsciousness by a scared practitioner waiting for re-inforcements would soon result in brain damage or death.

The powers of Kung Fu never fail!
-- Hong Kong Phooey

[Fish of Fury]

great link Ryu.
now i finally know what the heck you evil grappling people are talking about :)
seriously though, for a non grappling guy it's clarified a lot,thanks

__________________________________________________ _________________________ "I'm just trying to lull you into a genuine sense of security!"

[scotty1]

I don't know much about grappling and don't have time to study so things like that make me a little better prepared I think. :)

[Badger]

Cool article.
So BJJ is better than Kungfu. ;)


Badger

Support The Economy. Buy A Gun.

[LEGEND]

David...u hold it more than 3 mins after the guy passes out then u worry!

A

[shaolinboxer]

Our dojo is having a fundraiser and is giving away a video called "Aikido Techniques for Police" when you make a donation. The techniques are intersting, particularly (IMO) the application of sankyo againt passive resistance.

This is something I had never considered...the need to move or control some when the simply lie down and go limp in protest.

Here is a description:

Take the person's hand as if your were going to shake hands with them, standing on the same side of their body as the hand you are "shaking".

Walk in a circle around their head (while holding their hand) winding up facing the direction their head is pointing on the far side of their body.

Kneel down, take thier wrist (really the top of their plam just beyond the wrist) with your other hand and lift their elbow from the palm straight up to get them to stand up.

Ofcourse, an wrist control can be resisted by simply allowing you arm to break.

[Crimson Phoenix]

That was great, now I KNOW what the hell they're talking about in, their BJJ mumbo jumbo :D

[Satanachia]

Okay this is my first post so go easy on me.

I havn't been training that that long, but we do have some grappling in our style which look alot like this. But i noticed a few differences and things i would prefer with some of the techniques. Of course, knees, elbows, eye gouges and groin strikes will always be a problem.

But technique number seven seems (The Open Guard)seems to just scream "open yourself up for groin strike". Just look at the pic:
http://www.defendu.com/images/LEO_open_guard_knees_on_chest.jpg

That raised fist is only going one place. Ironically, since he can't hit the first head, so he should strike for the other :)

Now i realise there are limited things you can do while someones on top of you, but from this position, you can add the incentive of pain by interlocking your feet behind the attackers back, and squezing your legs/knees together in an effort to crush the floating ribs. Its not comfortable.

We also train number 10. alot. The rear carotoid restraint. But we also use a slightly different approach to the one in the pic.
http://www.defendu.com/images/LEO_rear_neck_restraint_2_elbow_position.jpg

Except instead of shrugging shoulders up(which would raise your center of gravity, and makes it easier for the person, if they're strong enough, to bend down and throw you forward over themselves), we would place the opposite hand behind the persons head and use it in conjuction, to push the head forward over the crook of the arm, while choking with the first arm, which can give you huge ammounts of leverage IF NEED BE.
The hand of the choking arm, rests in the crook of your other arms elbow, giving even more leverage and support if needed.
The addition of kicking out the knee of the guy while he's in this position also stops any threat of him throwing you over forward.

Well that it now, its done. My first post. Hope it went okay... :D

[Kevin73]

Working as a deputy in corrections, it was interesting to read. A couple things I noticed though that should be highlighted from the article. 1) They said that it was good for holding the bad guy until more help arrived. Key thing there out on the street you don't have back up to arrive and you will need to learn either more breaks, or ending moves because you can't hold him there all night. 2) I noticed that they changed their statistic from their old "over 90% of fights go to the ground" to 65 to 85%. Again, only about 1/4 of the fights I've seen have gone to the ground accidently meaning they clinch and since neither has good stance they trip and fall. I would say that this stat applies more to where one person is trying to take it to the ground. I know that sounds stupid but I think it is important to realize that most don't just end up on the ground when people want to stay up, their stats are based on LEO and DOC stats of officers purposely trying to take a subject down for cuffing in which case most will go down if you haven't trained for a takedown.

I'm not dogging grappling, I think it is a very important tool to have, but like any tool one needs to know when and where to use it and what it's advantages and disadvantages are (just like for striking too).

"God gave you a brain, and it annoys Him greatly when you choose not to use it."

[Merryprankster]

Satanachia,

Actually, locking your legs around your opponent and squeezing generally causes neither that much pain to your victim, nor is it particularly effective as a "submission," type hold. Most of us really can't apply that much pressure for a long enough time to get anywhere. It is VERY useful as control, however. BJJ'ers call it "closed guard."

The "open guard" position you are seeing is a poor photo. First, there are many open guard positions. Secondly, what you cannot see in that photo is that the bottom man's knees are braced against his assailant's chest, with his thighs squeezed together. This serves to increase the distance to his groin, and block the attackers ability to move forward, reducing the effectiveness of the strike since the attacker has to "reach". The thighs together offers protection against the strike as well. All of this, combined with the angle of the bottom man's hips, which are off the ground, make it hard for the strike to reach the groin.

The hips of the ground also means that he can move his hips up or down, or sideways, to slip and fade the groin strike as necessary.

Lastly, and this is just an FYI, not trying to be snooty, there are a ton of things, many, many sweeps and submissions, to be done from the guard position. Used properly it is a great weapon, and in my opinion, vital to your ability to get up off the ground safely and quickly in a violent encounter.

[Satanachia]

MerryPrankster...

I can assure you, a lock around the kidneys and squeezing when done correctly is quite, how should i put it, painful/uncomfortable.
But i of course realize your not going to win a fight, or probably get a submission from it in a fight.
Its not a big technique as such, more so as a way of suddenly inflicting alot of discomfort on someone who's in that position of you while you move onto something else. Well that's how we do that kind of thing anyway, i've got absolutely no idea about BJJ, we've just used "similar" tecniques in some of our grappling and wrestling.

As for the number of techniques available from the guard position, i plead ignorance. I don't do BJJ, and have absolutely no idea what the guard position even is. All my comments come from similar things, from different styles, and no doubt with varyingly different names to said moves. :)

And i still reckon i could get a groin strike in ;)

[Water Dragon]

If I were to learn one open guard, it would have to be the spider guard.

Most actions of men can be explained by observing a pack of dogs. Not wild dogs, just neighborhood dogs who all scurry under the fence on the same night and set off together to reclaim a glimmer of the glory their species possessed before domestication.

[Sharky]

ok then, he could get a good few punches to the stomach if not the groin then eh?

All i wanted was some RICE CAKES! Now? WE MUST BATTLE.

[jimmy23]

Satanachia, when you get conditioned that squeeze wont bug you too much, when we roll guys try it a lot and at worst its an irritation


"You guys have obviously never done any real fighting if you are mocking spitting"
Spinning Backfist

[rogue]

Royce used something similar on Sevren in UFC 4.

"Americans don't have the courage to come here," Mullah Mohammed Omar, leader of the Taliban


There is only one tactical principle which is not subject to change; it is, 'To use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death, and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time.' Patton

[Knifefighter]

There are many, many types of open guards and it is very tough to get in a decent groin strike from any of the open guard position. The position shown in the picture is a transitory open guard. What the guy on the bottom will do next is to grab onto the opponent's left wrist with both of his hands. He will also bring his right foot into the opponent's hip/groin (sometimes getting in a pretty decent groin kick of his own) area. At the same time, he will bring his left foot into the opponent's bicep to keep him from striking or use the left foot to deliver kicks into the opponent's facial area.

He also has the option of transitioning into a closed guard by separating his knees as the opponent attempts his strike or of sliding his knees up into the opponent's biceps and holding behind the opponent's arms, thus immobilizing any striking attempts.

As far as the rear choke, the picture only shows the first part of the choke. Next, the officer will reach over the opponent's head with his free hand, driving his fingers into either the eyes or nose and forcefully pull the head back. This allows the wrapping arm to penetrate deep into the neck. Once this is achieved, the free arm moves back and the hand of the arm around the neck will be brought into the bicep/elbow area and the hand will move from the facial area onto the back of the head, pushing it down and completing the choke. To keep from being thrown over, BJJ pulls the opponent back and "puts the hooks in", wrapping the legs over and around the opponent's thighs. With a well applied choke the whole sequence from initiation to unconsciousness is usually about five to eight seconds.

[Water Dragon]

Did you ever get to play with the trachea choke with the fingers we were talking about a few months back. I was curious as to your success with it.

Most actions of men can be explained by observing a pack of dogs. Not wild dogs, just neighborhood dogs who all scurry under the fence on the same night and set off together to reclaim a glimmer of the glory their species possessed before domestication.

[gazza99]

It seems if you teach cops this stuff you are better off sending them into the streets without guns! They may just get good enough at it to get in a tangle with someone and get killed with their own weapon. Or put themselves into a clinch that another officer has to compromise his safty to get his buddy out of it.
Gary

"Of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong"-Dennis Miller
www.pressurepointfighting.com (http://www.pressurepointfighting.com)

[This message was edited by Gary on 11-06-01 at 07:35 PM.]

[Sharky]

is that supposed to be a joke?

All i wanted was some RICE CAKES! Now? WE MUST BATTLE.

[joedoe]

That was very informative. As another person who doesn't know much about BJJ, it was good to be able to see how the techniques are executed to understand the mechanics behind it all.

It is also important to note that they don't just teach BJJ - they also teach the law enforcement officers striking techniques as well.

cxxx[]:::::::::::>
You're fu(king up my chi

[Stranger]

Forget the BJJ, where is the defendu at that site? :confused:

I don't get mad.
I get stabby.

[Grahf1]

Gary-

This thread was much better off without you...

[gazza99]

True Grahf, maybe, I hate to induce any reality into a thread, but hey thats life. Get over it....

"Of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong"-Dennis Miller
www.pressurepointfighting.com (http://www.pressurepointfighting.com)

[Xebsball]

Actually, the whole forum is a lot better without people with NO martial art training.

-------------------------
"I AM EFFECTIVNESS"

[joedoe]

I actually think that while you don't want to get into grappling range if you are a law enforcement officer, it is better that you at least know what to do if you do end up there. Also, as a law enforcement officer is supposed to apprehend offenders, don't you think some sort of submission technique might come in handy?

cxxx[]:::::::::::>
You're fu(king up my chi

[gazza99]

Good point Abandit, Its just you shouldnt teach them to try and get in the clinch for example willingly. They should attempt to make the suspect submissive enough that grappling is not neccesary, if the suspect attacks the LEO then of course they should have a full range of techniques on hand.
Gary

"Of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong"-Dennis Miller
www.pressurepointfighting.com (http://www.pressurepointfighting.com)

[Grahf1]

Gary -

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>True Grahf, maybe, I hate to induce any reality into a thread, but hey thats life. Get over it....[/quote]

Whatever you say, Mr. Pressure Point Fighter.....LOL

[joedoe]

But in order to detain an offender, they are going to have to get into grappling range unless they are going to beat them into submission using strikes (either punching/kicking or using a nightstick) until the offender is willing to submit. Now given the bad publicity surrounding police brutality, maybe a bit of grappling technique is handy?

I agree, it should probably not be the first approach to try and clinch with them, particularly if they are able to go for your weapon. However after moving through a striking stage an LEO would probably have to move in to restrain the offender, which is where the grappling knowledge would be useful I guess.

cxxx[]:::::::::::>
You're fu(king up my chi

[gazza99]

your right abandit, it would definately be handy, my point was that such techniques should not be jumped right into as per the obvious risks.

Grahf: from your profile-
"Interested in discussing martial arts. I have No martial arts training yet. "

Spend less time typing, and some time training, perhaps you can get with Ralek and play some tekken, at least then you'd have some sort of experience to speak from..

"Of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong"-Dennis Miller
www.pressurepointfighting.com (http://www.pressurepointfighting.com)

[joedoe]

I guess we are in agreement then :)

cxxx[]:::::::::::>
You're fu(king up my chi

[GinSueDog]

Water Dragon,
I'd rather work the butterfly over the spider as the spider guard isn't as effective without your opponent wearing a gi.

Ryu,
Cool article...

"Ninjas are not dangerous. They are more afraid of you than you are of them." --The Tick

[joedoe]

Could someone explain the differences between all the different guards please? Also, what kind of situation you would use each one in?

cxxx[]:::::::::::>
You're fu(king up my chi

[Chris McKinley]

The information posted at the site is some good fairly basic BJJ. In a real encounter, where simplicity reigns, the techniques shown are simple enough that an LEO who isn't a full-time stylist can pull them off fairly dependably....to an extent.

However, writing as someone who has faced armed assailants, there are some glaringly obvious points of vulnerability depicted in the pics. Before I get into them, for the sake of fairness, it's worth mentioning that officers' hands are often tied with nice, pretty little politically correct ribbon to the point where they simply are not allowed to do what is necessary to prevent such vulnerabilities. Therefore, critique of the techniques offered, no matter how valid, may be a moot point to some extent.

That said, take a look at the two photos listed for The Clinch technique. In the first pic, the officer is performing a structurally defensive entry into the clinch which assumes a two-hands-high posture on the part of the suspect. Now, I WILL give the officer credit for intelligence enough to understand that the suspect won't ALWAYS have both hands high, but the technique as described seems to rely on it. Either way, that particular configuration of the officer's arms leaves his sidearm and/or baton readily accessible by the suspect.

The second pic, depicting a single overhook clinch, is an improvement in that the officer does have some degree of contact and possibly control of at least the suspect's right arm, but in reality, not nearly enough to prevent a left-carry sidearm from being removed.

Having trained LEO's myself, I can attest to the difficulty, but also the importance, of weapons retention training. The Clinch technique as shown, while valid for two unarmed combatants, is at the very least incomplete as far as they have described it. Somewhat disappointingly, the article fails even to mention weapons retention in passing.

The Rear Takedown, as shown, is a valid and dependable move, and there really isn't much to criticize here, except for perhaps the decision to go to the ground intentionally. Unless the officer's backup is already present, this is nearly always a mistake in a real encounter, made even worse by the officer being restricted to only submission and restraint levels of force.

Next is The Mount. As described, it requires the officer to remain prone with his vision obscured and with both his hands committed in such a way that weapons retention becomes impossible, especially if a third person decides to assist the suspect. He's also very poorly set up to resist being bucked by the suspect. As specifically described in the article, unless the officer's backup is already present and possibly already radioing for more backup, this position is untenable for the officer in a real encounter. However, the author does at least acknowledge the need to keep the suspect's hands away from the officer's weapons.

The Back Mount is a major improvement, IF the officer is able to get the suspect there, however it absolutely relies on the suspect rolling over onto his stomach to escape the mount. Even if the suspect does not buck the officer, the officer relaxing his knees leaves him more open to various sweeps, some of which are simple enough that even an untrained suspect might be able to perform them fairly intuitively. At least the Back Mount does allow the officer to begin cuffing the suspect, which is the only type of submission that really matters.

As for The Guard, whether closed or open, in real encounters, this position is almost always to be avoided at all costs. While in the ring or on the mat certain stylists have been able to make this position not only workable but dominating, this position does not usually translate well to the street, where the person with the superior position is usually always in a position of decided advantage.

As for the Kimura, if the officer, through whatever bad luck or poor choice, finds himself underneath a suspect, it is at least a very good technique to serve as damage control in making the best of a bad situation. As such, I would highly recommend this particular technique, GIVEN that it comes with a warning that it is meant as a recovery from a bad street position and is meant to serve as a means of allowing the officer to re-attain a more viable position of getting out from under the suspect.

The Side Mount is a better position, however, once again, weapons retention becomes a serious consideration here. In the heat of an arrest, an officer may not always remember that he should attempt a side mount from the subject's left side.

The Knee Mount is superb, ONLY if a secure armbar has been attained. Without the armbar, it's not of much value at all. The armbar makes all the difference in the world in a real street situation. Unfortunately, this fact isn't even casually mentioned in the article.

Finally, the Rear Carotid Restraint. The first thing I have to mention is that it is taken completely out of context. Carotid chokes are NEVER meant as submission maneuvers in a real street encounter. They just don't work that way. The physiological effect is fairly digital. That is, it's either in effect or it's not. Due to the internal structure of the blood vessels involved, there is simply no way to render a suspect "partially woozy" to the point of compliance, and then keep him there, with a blood choke. In reality, the suspect remains fully functional and able to resist up until the moment of unconsciousness; there is no gradual decline. Therefore, such a choke is only useful to the officer if he is fully prepared to render the suspect unconscious.

He may very well be, especially if he's in a position of desperation, however, many states have disallowed the use of ALL chokes for the purpose of submission or restraint. An officer would need to be completely clear regarding the law on this matter in his particular state.

Bottom line: the article presents some reasonably simple and easy to apply techniques from a proven system of fighting, however, it does so without regard to vital concepts such as weapons retention, vulnerability of the officer to additional suspects, and compromising of the ability to call for backup. These aren't minor grievances. On the street, any one of them could mean the difference between life or death for the officer. I give the article a reserved "thumbs up", but would strongly recommend the material be run through the Murphy's Law filter by experienced veteran LEO's before it is taught "as is".

[Kevin73]

To Chris McKinley: Great post, it was nice to see another LEO viewpoint. I agree with everything that you said.

Just a side note that Chris had mentioned, in my state you can't even do the choke shown because it's too easy to damage the trachea because of the adrenaline factor. They allow what's called a lateral vascular choke which is from the side. Also, any choke is considered lethal/deadly force for our dept. so you can't just knock 'em out to subdue them unless yours or someone elses life is in danger.

"God gave you a brain, and it annoys Him greatly when you choose not to use it."

[Water Dragon]

Am I confused on names? I'm referring to the one where you are holding on to their arms and continually posing into their hips with your feet. It transitions nicely into your shins up in their armpits if they try to punch. Is that a Spider or a butterfly?

Most actions of men can be explained by observing a pack of dogs. Not wild dogs, just neighborhood dogs who all scurry under the fence on the same night and set off together to reclaim a glimmer of the glory their species possessed before domestication.

[gfhegel21]

Uh, the article does make at least "passing reference" to weapons retention, by trying to keep the officer aware of which is his "gun side" in any grappling encounter. Most every technique makes some reference to the officer's gun side. Maybe the emphasis should have been even greater, but it's unfair to say there was not even "passing reference."

Another point, regarding the undesirability of the guard, I think the article seems in agreement. It suggests that it's a defensive position if the officer is unable to maintain top position (or avoid grappling entirely) with a physically powerful suspect.

What the article lacks is some context, about WHEN officers should and shouldn't close to grappling rage. In other words, a broader tactical context. But it does a fair job of providing a few tools for officers that do wind up grappling a suspect. It does fail to show various disengagement techniques if the suspect tries to grapple and the officer does not want to.

And for Gary, you really are a simpleton. Officers get into grappling range with suspects ALL THE TIME, so they better know how to handle themselves.

How can you possibly say knowing these tools would work against them? It would only work against them if they foolishly assumed, as you did, that this article is saying that grappling is the ONLY or even the BEST way to subdue a suspect.

I know you have a stake in trying to put down any technique that is not in your "pressure point fighting" b.s. I'm sure you're working your way into defrauding local police and sheriff by departments providing "instruction" for law enforcement.

By the way, I notice that the "products" section of your page is empty. Is that what your new videos are all about? Preparing to take your show on the road? I would say what you teach is much more dangerous to the student than to any potential opponent, instilling a false sense of confidence in people that they can defend themselves without ever having put their skills to the test. In fact, it's more than dangerous, it's disingenuous and irresponsible.

Jesus Mary and Joseph, the notion that you, of all people, would "introduce a dose of reality" to this thread ... more like "introduce a dose of ignorant, uninformed drivel from someone who lives in a fantasy world."

[Merryprankster]

Just to clarify:

I don't think the guard is the place to be in a fight. Knowing it, and some sweeps, however, makes you less likely to have your ass handed to you on the ground.

[gazza99]

Of course they should know how to handle themselves, perhaps you should work on your reading comprehention a bit. I have stated this before! My point was Its just they should not try to get into that position straight away.

"How can you possibly say knowing these tools would work against them? "

If these are the only tools they are given they may be too quick to get in a clinch. Also see Chris M's post for specifics. Heres a good quote that is relevant to a problem with it...
"These aren't minor grievances. On the street, any one of them could mean the difference between life or death for the officer."

"I know you have a stake in trying to put down any technique that is not in your "pressure point fighting" b.s.

Accually I have NO stake in putting anything down, Im for anything that works. As to pressure points being BS, that is your opinion and an ignorant one at that. Keep in mind one must know how to fight BEFORE bothering with pressure points, your assumptions about me are incorrect.

"By the way, I notice that the "products" section of your page is empty. Is that what your new videos are all about? Preparing to take your show on the road"

Accually , I was going to eventually put some shirts on there, and maybe a video on some basics for my current students, but nothing extravagent, and Ill make no claims like the any youll find in any MA magazine like the "kill anyone, octuple your speed", or "This system is undeafeatable" Perhaps you should write your thuggish dribble to the dozens of instructors advertising such things?

" I would say what you teach is much more dangerous to the student than to any potential opponent, instilling a false sense of confidence in people that they can defend themselves without ever having put their skills to the test. In fact, it's more than dangerous, it's disingenuous and irresponsible. "

You are wrong, I have used my art to save my own life, by saying "without ever having put their skills to the test" are you suggesting that I encourage my students to pick fights with people? Whats irresponsible is you making such absurd comments, when you have never met, or trained with me. Your judgment seem clouded by your ego, whats funny to me is that the probability is great that I could end your life in a under a few seconds in a real confrontation. So you can take your insults and assumptions and shove them.
I understand your cynisism but If you were right, chances are I wouldnt be alive to type this.
Have you ever had to use your art to save your own life? How many times have you been in a real life situation? Have you ever had to fight more than 1 person at a time?

"Of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong"-Dennis Miller
www.pressurepointfighting.com (http://www.pressurepointfighting.com)

[Chris McKinley]

San*****a, thanks for the reply, but I'm not an LEO myself. I have trained many of them over the years, however, IMO, the most valuable role I have played for them is to act as Murphy for them. In other words, showing them what can go wrong with the basic training they have received, or even with some of the traditional martial arts training many of them have pursued privately.

gfhegel21, RE: "Uh, the article does make at least "passing reference" to weapons retention, by trying to keep the officer aware of which is his "gun side" in any grappling encounter. Most every technique makes some reference to the officer's gun side. Maybe the emphasis should have been even greater, but it's unfair to say there was not even "passing reference."". You bring up a miscommunication on my part here, my apologies. I should have made clear that, when I made that particular statement, it was in reference to what the article had to say about the particular technique I was reviewing only. However, most every technique does NOT make reference, either sufficiently or at all, to weapons retention. In my review, I went through each technique one at a time evaluating it for this and other important concepts. The article, as a whole, does make some reference, but not, IMO, commensurately to its importance.

Additionally, for the side mount in particular, I mentioned the fact that, during the heat and chaos of a real arrest, an officer may not remember to only apply the side mount from the suspect's left side (or right for a lefty officer). IMO, this is a failing of the technique for LEO application context.

Also, as I mentioned, the techniques as shown bring up serious questions of an officer's ability to visually spot additional suspects, vulnerability to additional suspects, and compromise of ability to call for backup.

All in all, the techniques listed would make a good addition to the officer's arsenal IF AND ONLY IF his backup was already present AND improvements were made regarding the issue of weapons retention. It should be noted that I did begin my review by allowing that, due to political constraints, critique of not only these techniques, but of any techniques, might prove to be a moot point.

Anyway, even with my reservations, I did give the set of techniques a thumbs up. All of the same concerns I had would still be there if the techniques in question were from another martial art source, to be fair. I'm just kinda hard to please. :P

[GinSueDog]

Water Dragon,
The spider guard is where you control the sleeves of your opponent with your hands while placing your feet on his biceps, it is most effective when your opponent is wearing a gi. The butterfly guard sounds like what you were thinking of. It works whether or not either of you are wearing gi's.-ED

"Ninjas are not dangerous. They are more afraid of you than you are of them." --The Tick

[Water Dragon]

My bad, but let's swap names. Spider Guard sounds cooler.

Most actions of men can be explained by observing a pack of dogs. Not wild dogs, just neighborhood dogs who all scurry under the fence on the same night and set off together to reclaim a glimmer of the glory their species possessed before domestication.

[GinSueDog]

It does sound better... :D

"Ninjas are not dangerous. They are more afraid of you than you are of them." --The Tick

[gfhegel21]

Chris: Points well taken.

Gary: You've basically conceded my points about your misunderstanding of the article. I take it you retract your suggestion that if you train police in these techniques then you ought to take their guns away?

As for your investment in "pressure point fighting," you also concede that you are about to go commercial with a range of merchandise, including t-shirts and videos. So my point is on target there.

And as for the self defense value of whatever it is you teach, you certainly have no problem bagging other styles as self-defense frauds, and suggesting that UFC is not "real" fighting, with the strong implication being that your style IS superior for self-defense, and DOES prepare you for real-fighting. Is this what you mean to say? Because based on your web page and other posts on this forum, I see no evidence to support your claims.

First, your videos are worth very little in teaching someone about fighting. They show me nothing in the way of a technique that could actually be applied against a resisting opponent. So, if you want to train to fight, you HAVE TO FIGHT, unlike what ever it is you are doing in your clips.

Second, you have posted here that you do not spar or fight regularly. As a matter of fact, your posts have suggested the opposite. Perhaps you have revised your training methods, so you may correct me if you are wrong. In any case, if you want to know how to fight, you HAVE TO FIGHT, which, as far as I know, you do not do.

Third, it is a revelation to me that you already have to know how to fight before studying pressure point fighting. So what you're saying is that what you have to offer is simply an add-on to whatever other art you practice? If you can already fight, then what do you really have to offer people? If people want personal growth they can do tai chi. If you only accept people who know how to fight, then undoubtedly your students will be able to protect themselves, because you have nothing to teach them. If, on the other hand, they do learn something from you it will probably degrade their ability to protect themselves, based on what is you your website.

You say I'm making assumptions about you. That is not true. I am making observations based on your arrogant posts and your arrogant web page. Based on what you present on your site, one can only conclude that you can't fight worth a ****.

And I never suggested that you tell your students to get in fights. How about hard or full-contact sparring? How about matwork? How much body toughening do they do? I'm not talking about outside of your class, I'm talking about as part of what you teach. Perhaps these are not the same as "real fighting," but they are a lot closer to it than the fantasizing about it that goes on in your clips.

As for your claims of defending yourself etc. etc., I find it hard to believe that you have a long history of streetfighting. Perhaps you can share some of your tales from your dark past of beating up people (alone or in groups) on the street. Who knows, maybe you are a tough guy. You would never know it from the nonsense on your site. Please, regale us with your stories.

Continuing, I make no claims to being a badass. But it doesn't take a badass to point out bull**** when he sees it. For what it is worth, I have trained full-contact, and I have trained both in striking arts (kickboxing, muay thai, shotokan) and grappling arts (judo primarily, but some experience in JJ and silat). And I have trained with good fighters, and I am confident that I understand at least what the basics of fighting are like. Your clips do not suggest the slightest knowledge of what fighting is like. Perhaps your skills are "deceptive," but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

And it's even funnier that you call my comments "thuggish," when just a little bit later on, as you grow more emboldened by the sound of your own typing, you proclaim that you could probably "end my life" in a real confrontation. The irony is almost too much to handle:

hegel: The techniques Gary teaches have jack **** to do with fighting.
Gary: hegel is a thug.
hegel: hegel is merely going on what Gary has said in his posts and what he has on his website.
Gary: I could kill hegel with ease.
hegel: Please don't threaten me you brute.

You're killing me right now in fact. With your comedy.

I don't think it's really my ego at stake right now. If your ego were a little more healthy, you probably could avoid making crypto-threats and respond rationally when somebody calls you out when you are bull****ting.

[gazza99]

I figured youd call me on the thug contradiction, anyhow your logic is extremely faulty, and I was correct when I used the word ASSumption, as you can make no definate conclution based on your observations. If you have any advice to offer on what I can do to make it seem more realistic to you I would like to hear it.(Constructive advice) But I do not think I am marketting to you anyhow, as you seem to stubborn to think taijiquan or dim-mak points can help your fighting ability in any way.

I dont really consider my plans for a school t-shirt, and possibly one video in the next couple years constitutes a "range of merchandise" but whatever.

"I take it you retract your suggestion that if you train police in these techniques then you ought to take their guns away? "
That remark was not meant to be a serious suggestion in the first place..

"and as for the self defense value of whatever it is you teach, you certainly have no problem bagging other styles as self-defense frauds, and suggesting that UFC is not "real" fighting,"

I only bagg on TKD on my website in the self-defense aspects, and whats wrong with suggesting the UFC isnt real fighting? Its not, after so many MMA thuggs hounded me Erle Montaigue sent me his take on it to replace with my own opinion.

"with the strong implication being that your style IS superior for self-defense, and DOES prepare you for real-fighting. "

Sorry if any implications I put out offend you, but like I said pick up any MA mag, and read some ads, that will really **** you off, especially if you dont like what I may or may not be implicating.

. "In any case, if you want to know how to fight, you HAVE TO FIGHT, which, as far as I know, you do not do. "

You are correct in the you truly have to fight to really know how, I do beleive there is value in sparring, there is also value in other training methods like push-hands, and other various reactionary drills.

"So what you're saying is that what you have to offer is simply an add-on to whatever other art you practice? If you can already fight, then what do you really have to offer people? "

I do not just teach points, I teach taijiquan, which is used for self defense with or without the points. Taijiquan is not just a health dance contrary to popular belief, it is accually a good martial art. For both health and self defense.

"Perhaps you can share some of your tales from your dark past of beating up people (alone or in groups) on the street. Who knows, maybe you are a tough guy. You would never know it from the nonsense on your site. Please, regale us with your stories."

I beleive Ive already shared some exp. on this here before. I do not have a long streetfighting history, but I have been involved in a hand to knife situation (he had the knife), a few minor fights, and a fight with a few guys at once, my training saved me in each senario.

" -and respond rationally when somebody calls you out when you are bull****ting."

The problem is that I am not bull****ting, and of course you seem to know everything about fighting, since you have been trainined in every art, and can formulate a cold hard judement about something you have probably never seen in person, and do not understand.
I figured the absurdity of my hyposcrisy would amuse you, so allow me to make you laugh a bit more. ASSumption on your part can be dangerous (not a threat by the way), I always go into something thinking the other person is better than I. No matter how capable or incapable I may observe him to be, I do not allow my assumptions to lead to a gross underestimation. I hope your obvious tendency to judge others based on so very little does not lead to your demise in any way.

Your "observations" -assumptions- are way off the mark here, regardless of any further arguement you may present me. My students know it, I know it, and every instructor of another art, or person I meet and train with knows it.

If someone that I touch hands with, or train with has a critique similar to yours, or if I get my A@@ handed to me in the street becuase Im in some fantasy land-I will gladly appologize to you and admit you were right-but dont hold your breath.
Gary

"Of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong"-Dennis Miller
www.pressurepointfighting.com (http://www.pressurepointfighting.com)

[gfhegel21]

(can't respond because of holding breath)

[Grahf1]

Gary-

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Spend less time typing, and some time training, perhaps you can get with Ralek and play some tekken, at least then you'd have some sort of experience to speak from.[/quote]

Whatever. Your argument makes no sense at this time because I wrote that I had "no martial arts" training when I first registered.

Besides, I actually kind of lied. I did have martial arts training. TKD and Judo. I do not consider my TKD to be real training, so I didn't mention it in my profile. As for Judo, I went to a crappy club, and didn't learn anything revolutionary.

OTher than that, I have trained in BJJ for about 5 months now. I also started Thai boxing 2 months ago.